Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-28T00:23:41.276Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Using diffusion of innovations theory to understand agricultural producer perspectives on cover cropping in the inland Pacific Northwest, USA

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 January 2021

Avery Lynn Lavoie Open the ORCID record for Avery Lynn Lavoie [Opens in a new window] ,
Katherine Dentzman Open the ORCID record for Katherine Dentzman [Opens in a new window]  and
Chloe Bradley Wardropper Open the ORCID record for Chloe Bradley Wardropper [Opens in a new window]
Avery Lynn Lavoie*
Affiliation:
Department of Environmental Science, University of Idaho, 875 Perimeter Drive MS 1139, Moscow, Idaho83843, USA
Katherine Dentzman
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho, USA
Chloe Bradley Wardropper
Affiliation:
University of Idaho, Department of Natural Resources and Society, 875 Perimeter Drive MS 1139, Moscow, Idaho, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Avery Lynn Lavoie, E-mail: alavoie@uidaho.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

There is increased interest in cover crops on farms; those planted during the fallow period or in place of a cash crop to improve soil and water quality. Despite extensive research suggesting that the practice can enhance on-farm resilience, cover crop use is not widespread, especially across the dryland wheat-growing region of the USA inland Pacific Northwest. Cover crops are being promoted across this region as a means to improve agronomic conditions and farmer livelihoods. Yet, there is limited producer-centered social science research to understand the regional and field-level challenges associated with the practice. To address this gap, we draw from the diffusion of innovations theory to examine the perceived relative advantage (the degree to which cover crops are compatible with the current agricultural system), and trialability of cover crops. Trialability encompasses the relative complexity and observability of the practice. Interviews (n = 28) were conducted with producers to better understand perceptions on relative advantage and how cover crop characteristics may contribute to barriers to adoption. Based on the results from interviews, focus groups (n = 48) were conducted to explore potential avenues for improving the integration of cover crops into existing cropping systems. Analysis of interviews with dryland crop and livestock producers suggested that perceptions of low relative advantage, including low compatibility with common regional management systems, perceived lack of profitability and increased cost of inputs act as deterrents to cover crop integration. Low trialability was associated with the complexity of experimentation, a lack of directly observable results and inflexible regional policies. These perceptions were compounded by a lack of region-specific agronomic and economic information on cover crops. Analysis of focus groups with crop and livestock producers and agricultural stakeholders suggested that there are several opportunities to improve potential adoption strategies and improve perceptions of relative advantage and trialability. Understanding the unique management goals of producers within the environmental, social and economic context in which they operate will better inform regional policies, outreach and future adoption strategies.

Keywords

Key words: Agricultural producer perspectivescover cropsdiffusion of innovationsrelative advantagetrialability
Type
Research Paper
Information
Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems , Volume 36 , Issue 4 , August 2021 , pp. 384 - 395
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adger, WN, Dessai, S, Goulden, M, Hulme, M, Lorenzoni, I, Nelson, DR, Naess, LO, Wolf, J and Wreford, A (2009) Are there social limits to adaptation to climate change? Climatic Change 93, 335–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ahnström, J, Hockert, J, Bergea, HL, Francis, C and Skelton, P (2008) Farmers and nature conservation: what is known about attitudes, context factors and actions affecting conservation? Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 24, 38–47. doi: 10.1017/S1742170508002391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arbuckle, JG and Roesch-McNally, GE (2015) Cover crop adoption in Iowa: the role of perceived practice characteristics. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 70, 418–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atwell, RC, Schulte, LA and Westphal, LM (2009) Natural Resource Ecology and Management Publications Natural Resource Ecology and Management Linking Resilience Theory and Diffusion of Innovations Theory to Understand the Potential for Perennials in the U.S. Corn Belt.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barr, N and Cary, J (2000) Influencing Improved Natural Resource Management on Farms. A Guide to Understanding Factors Influencing the Adoption of Sustainable Resource Practices. Canberra: Bureau of Rural Sciences.Google Scholar
Baumgart-Getz, A, Prokopy, LS and Floress, K (2012) Why farmers adopt best management practice in the United States: a meta-analysis of the adoption literature. Journal of Environmental Management 96, 17–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bergtold, JS, Duff, PA, Hite, D and Raper, RL (2012) Demographic and management factors affecting the adoption and perceived yield benefit of winter cover crops in the southeast. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 44, 99–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergtold, JS, Ramsey, S, Maddy, L and Williams, JR (2017) A review of economic considerations for cover crops as a conservation practice. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 34, 62–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergtold, Jason S, Ramsey, Steven, Maddy, Lucas and Williams, Jeffery R. (2019) A review of economic considerations for cover crops as a conservation practice. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 34, 62–76. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1742170517000278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bigelow, D, Borchers, A and Hubbs, T (2016) US Farmland Ownership, Tenure, and Transfer.Google Scholar
Charmaz, K (2006) Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods. In Denzin, NK and Lincoln, YS (eds), Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry, 2nd Edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 249–291.Google Scholar
Diederen, P, Meifl, HV, Wolters, A and Bijak, K (2003) Innovation adoption in agriculture: innovators, early adopters and laggards. Cahiers d’économie et sociologie rurales 67, 30–50.Google Scholar
Dolinska, A and d'Aquino, P (2016) Farmers as agents in innovation systems. Empowering farmers for innovation through communities of practice. Agricultural Systems 142, 122–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunn, M, Ulrich-Schad, JD, Prokopy, LS, Myers, RL, Watts, CR and Scanlon, K (2016) Perceptions and use of cover crops among early adopters: findings from a national survey. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 71, 29–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finkelnburg, DF, Hart, KN and Church, JA (2016) Cover crops demonstration project in north central Idaho. Journal of NACAA 9, 1-4.Google Scholar
Fliegel, FC and Kivlin, JE (1966) Attributes of innovations as factors in diffusion. American Journal of Sociology 72, 235–248.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Genius, M, Pantzios, CJ and Tzouvelekas, V (2006) Information acquisition and adoption of organic farming practices. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 31, 93–113.Google Scholar
Geurin, L and Geurin, T (1994) Constraints to the adoption of innovations in agricultural research and environmental management: a review. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 34, 549–571. Available at http://www.publish.csiro.au/an/EA9940549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghadim, AKA, Pannell, DJ and Burton, MP (2005) Risk, uncertainty, and learning in adoption of a crop innovation. Agricultural Economics 33, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamilton, AV, Mortensen, DA and Allen, MK (2017) The state of the cover crop nation and how to set realistic future goals for the popular conservation practice. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 72, 111A–115A.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huggins, D, Pan, B, Schillinger, W, Young, F, Machado, S and Painter, K (2013) Crop Diversity and Intensity in Pacific Northwest Dryland Cropping Systems. REACCH Annual Report, pp. 38–41.Google Scholar
Kalcic, MM, Frankenberger, J, Chaubey, I, Prokopy, L and Bowling, L (2015) Adaptive targeting: engaging farmers to improve targeting and adoption of agricultural conservation practices. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 51, 973–991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karimi, T, Stockle, CO, Higgins, SS, Nelson, RL and Huggins, D (2017) Projected dryland cropping system shifts in the Pacific Northwest in response to climate change. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 5, 1–9. doi: 10.3389/fevo.2017.00020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirby, E, Pan, W, Huggins, D, Painter, K and Bista, P (2017) Rotational diversification and intensification. WSU Extension Bulletin. In Yorgey, G and Kruger, C (eds), Advances in Dryland Farming in the Inland Pacific Northwest. Pullman, WA, pp. 163–236.Google Scholar
Lambert, S D and Loiselle, C G (2008) Combining individual interviews and focus groups to enhance data richness. Journal of Advanced Nursing 62, 228–237.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Larkin, RP (2015) Soil health paradigms and implications for disease management. Annual Review of Phytopathology 53, 199–221.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lemke, AM, Lindenbaum, TT, Herbert, PME, Tear, TH and Herkert, JR (2010) Effects of outreach on the awareness and adoption of conservation practices by farmers in two agricultural watersheds of the Mackinaw River, Illinois. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 65, 304–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lin, BB (2011) Resilience in agriculture through crop diversification: adaptive management for environmental change. BioScience 61, 183–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lincoln, YS and Guba, EG (1994) Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds). The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA.Google Scholar
Marra, M, Pannell, DJ and Abadi Ghadim, A (2003) The economics of risk, uncertainty and learning in the adoption of new agricultural technologies: where are we on the learning curve? Agricultural Systems 75, 215–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melorose, J, Perroy, R and Careas, S (2015) Sustainable horticulture: understanding barriers to the adoption of innovation. Statewide Agricultural Land Use Baseline 1, 1446–1452.Google Scholar
Morrow, JG, Huggins, DR and Reganold, JP (2017) Climate change predicted to negatively influence surface soil organic matter of dryland cropping systems in the inland Pacific Northwest, USA. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 5, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nowak, PJ (1983) Obstacles to the adoption of conservation tillage. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 38, 162–165.Google Scholar
Öhlmér, B, Olson, K and Brehmer, B (1998) Understanding farmers’ decision making processes and improving managerial assistance. Agricultural Economics 18, 273–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Onwuegbuzie, AJ, Dickinson, WB, Leech, NL and Zoran, AG (2009) A qualitative framework for collecting and analyzing data in focus group research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 8, 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Padel, S (2001) Conversion to organic farming: a typical example of the diffusion of an innovation? (Special issue: politics, ideology and practice of organic farming). Sociologia Ruralis 41, 40–61. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9523.00169; http://ovidsp.ovid.com/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&CSC=Y&NEWS=N&PAGE=fulltext&D=caba5&AN=20013032860.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pan, WL, Schillinger, WF, Young, F, Kirby, EM, Yorgey, G, Borrelli, K, Brooks, E, McCracken, V, Maaz, T, Machado, S, Madsen, I, Johnson-Maynard, J, Port, L, Painter, K, Huggins, D, Esser, A, Collins, H, Stockle, C and Eigenbrode, S (2017) Integrating historic agronomic and policy lessons with New technologies to drive farmer decisions for farm and climate: the case of inland pacific northwestern. Frontiers in Environmental Science 5, 1–22. doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2017.00076.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pannell, DJ and Claassen, R (2020) The roles of adoption and behavior change in agricultural policy. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 42, 31–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pannell, DJ, Marshal, GR, Barr, N, Curtis, A, Vanclay, F and Wilkinson, R (2006) Understanding and promoting adoption of conservation practices by rural landholders. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 46, 1407–1424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pavek, PLS (2014) Evaluation of cover crops and planting dates for dryland rotations in Eastern Washington. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service. Plant Materials Technical Note No. 25, pp. 2–14. Available at https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_PLANTMATERIALS/publications/wapmctn12352.pdf.Google Scholar
Plastina, A, Lie, F, Miguez, F and Carlson, S (2018) Cover crops use in Midwestern US agriculture: perceived benefits and net returns. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 35, 1–11. doi: 10.1017/S1742170518000194.Google Scholar
Prokopy, LS, Floress, K, Kotthor-Weinkauf, D and Baumgart-Getz, A (2008) Determinants of agricultural best management practice adoption: evidence from the literature. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 63, 300–311. doi: 10.2489/jswc.63.5.300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prokopy, LS, Morton, L, Arbuckle, JG, Saylor Mase, A and Wilke, A (2015) Agricultural stakeholder views on climate change: implications for conducting research and outreach. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 96, 181–190. doi: 10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00172.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prokopy, LS, Floress, K, Arbuckle, JG, Eanes, FR, Gao, Y, Gramig, BB, Ranjan, R and Singh, AS (2019) Adoption of agricultural conservation practices in the United States: evidence from 35 years of quantitative literature. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 74, 520–534. doi: 10.2489/jswc.74.5.520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ranjan, P, Wardropper, CB, Eanes, FR, Redd, S, Harden, SC, Masuda, YJ and Prokopy, LS (2019) Understanding barriers and opportunities for adoption of conservation practices on rented farmland in the US. Land Use Policy 80, 214–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reimer, AP, Thompson, AW and Prokopy, LS (2012 a) The multi-dimensional nature of environmental attitudes among farmers in Indiana: implications for conservation adoption. Agriculture and Human Values 29, 29–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reimer, AP, Weinkauf, DK and Prokopy, LS (2012 b) The influence of perceptions of practice characteristics: an examination of agricultural best management practice adoption in two Indiana watersheds. Journal of Rural Studies 28, 118–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riley, M (2016) How does longer term participation in agri-environment schemes [re]shape farmers’ environmental dispositions and identities? Land Use Policy 52, 62–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, D (2018) Cover cropping and companion cropping for the Inland Northwest. Washington State University Extension.Google Scholar
Robertson, GP, Allen, VG, Boody, G, Boose, ER, Creamer, NG, Drinkwater, LE, Gosz, JR, Lynch, L, Havlin, JL, Jackson, LE, Pickett, STA, Pitelka, L, Randall, A, Reed, AS, Seastedy, TR, Waide, RB and Wall, DH (2008) Long-term agricultural research: a research, education, and extension imperative. BioScience 58, 640–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodriguez, JM, Molnar, JJ, Fazio, RA, Sydnor, E and Lowe, MJ (2009) Barriers to adoption of sustainable agriculture practices: change agent perspectives. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 24, 60–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roesch-McNally, GE, Basche, AD, Arbuckle, JG, Tyndal, JC, Miguez, F, Bowman, T and Clay, R (2017) The trouble with cover crops: farmers’ experiences with overcoming barriers to adoption. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 33, 322–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogers, EM (1995) Diffusion of Innovations. New York: Free Press.Google ScholarPubMed
Rogers, EM (2003) Diffusion of Innovations, 5th edn. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Rogers, EM (2010) Diffusion of Innovations. Simon and Schuster, New York.Google Scholar
Ryan, B and Gross, N (1943) Acceptance and diffusion of hybrid corn seed in two Iowa communities. Rural Sociology 8, 15–24.Google Scholar
Schillinger, WF and Papendick, RI (2008) Then and now: 125 years of dryland wheat farming in the Inland Pacific Northwest. Agronomy Journal 100 (3 Suppl.),166-182. doi: 10.2134/agronj2007.0027c.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schillinger, WF, Papendick, RI, Guy, ST, Rasmussen, PE and Kessel, C (2003) Dryland cropping in the Western United States. Pacific Northwest Conservation Tillage handbook 28, 1–23.Google Scholar
Senyolo, MP, Long, TB, Blok, V and Omta, O (2018) How the characteristics of innovations impact their adoption: an exploration of climate-smart agricultural innovations in South Africa. Journal of Cleaner Production 172, 3825–3840.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shampine, A (1998) Compensating for information externalities in technology diffusion models. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 80, 337–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singer, JW, Kaspar, TC and Pedersen, P (2007) Are cover crops being used in the US corn belt? Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 63, 353–358.Google Scholar
Stuart, D and Gillon, S (2013) Scaling up to address new challenges to conservation on US farmland. Land Use Policy 31, 223–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stubbs, M (2014) Conservation Reserve Program (CRP): Status and Current Issues. Congressional Research Service Report, pp. 1–20. Available at http://www.nationalaglawcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/assets/crs/R42783.pdf.Google Scholar
Thompson, WH and Carter, PG (2014) Cover crop water consumption in Southeastern Washington Palouse 0–10 cm soil moisture. Poster in ASA, CSSA and SSSA International Meeting.Google Scholar
Tosakana, NSP, Tassell, LW, Wulfhorst, JD, Mahler, BR, Brooks, ES and Kane, S (2010) Determinants of the adoption of conservation practices by farmers in the Northwest Wheat and Range Region. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 65, 404–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tracy, SJ (2013) Qualitative Research Methods, Handbook of Research Methods in Tourism: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. Wiley-Blackwell, West Sussex, UK. doi: 10.4337/9781781001295.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture (2019) Census of Agriculture: 2017 Publications. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service. Available at https://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/AgCensus/2017/index.php.Google Scholar
Vanclay, F (2004) Social principles for agricultural extension to assist in the promotion of natural resource management. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 44, 213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vanclay, F and Lawrence, G (1994) Farmer rationality and the adoption of environmentally sound practices; A critique of the assumptions of traditional agricultural extension. European Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension 1, 59–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wejnert, B (2002) Integrating models of diffusion of innovations: a conceptual framework. Annual Review of Sociology 28, 297–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, B and Zhang, L (2013) Farmer innovation diffusion via network building: a case of winter greenhouse diffusion in China. Agriculture and Human Values 30, 641–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yorgey, G, Painter, K, Borrelli, K, Kantor, S, Davis, H, Bernacchi, L, Kruger, C, Roe, D. et al. (2017) Farmer-to-Farmer Case Study Series: Increasing Resilience among Farmers in the Pacific Northwest 4, 16–17. Moscow, ID: University of Idaho.Google Scholar